Phil 3:4b-14
4 If others think they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless.
7 But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. 8 What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith. 10 I want to know Christ—yes, to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection from the dead.
12 Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. 13 Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.
This, the 2nd reading for Lent 5 just appears, essentially in a vacuum. We didn’t get a running start from the previous Sundays, and we won’t be continuing the thought in upcoming Sundays. So what are we to make of this text?
Putting two and two together, we know that Philippi was a largely Gentile settlement with not enough of a Jewish presence to warrant a synagogue (See Acts 16), yet it appears from the opening verses of Philippians chapter 3 that there is some kind of Judaizing-Christian “missionary” work afoot in Philippi. Here one must tread carefully because we know significantly less about these Jewish-Christians than we once thought. We also know significantly less about Paul’s very complex theology than we once thought. In his epistles, for instance, Paul often comes off sounding as though he has completely forsaken his own Jewish identity. Yet in the book of Acts when he’s in Jerusalem, he readily identifies himself as a Pharisee. What must be remembered is Paul’s “all things to all people” stance. His tone varies with his audience.
Vss 4-8a are quite fascinating to me. Here Paul essentially gives us his resume (note all of his Jewish “qualifications” are in the present tense), and this resume includes being a Pharisee. What’s more, AS A PHARISEE, Paul would already have had (a) a belief in the resurrection of the dead, and (b) an expectation that he—as one of the righteous ones working the system—would be a part of this resurrection. When it comes to be ON TRACK, Saul of Tarsus (as St. Paul had been known) had all of his ducks in a row. Recognizing this fact is, to me, of paramount importance if we’re going to understand the rest of the text. Look at it this way….if a prospective employer has met or exceeded everything on your wishlist and it looked like a good company to work for, why would you turn them down and keep looking? Odds are, you wouldn’t. You’d take the job. That’s what Paul’s saying. HE HAD IT ALL. But something happened to change that.
In vss 7-8 he says: “7 But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. 8 What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord...” I NOW CONSIDER LOSS. Why? Because of his encounter with Jesus the Messiah. Here it’s almost best to substitute the word Messiah for Christ, so as to avoid thinking of Christ as a synonym for Jesus. It’s difficult to say for sure, but as a Pharisee Paul likely had SOME Messianic expectations. If so, they probably followed the Messiah-hero ideal. But now, lo and behold, Paul has had an encounter with the true Messiah and turns out it is none other than Jesus of Nazareth—the one he now calls Lord/Kyrios.
To me, I see this whole section as being ‘balance-sheet’ oriented. Paul is telling his readers that he HAD been working the Pharisee system and had as high of an expectation on return as anyone could expect, but that once he encountered Jesus, he chucked ALL of those expectations for **CERTAINTY**. He went from HOPING that he had his righteousness working for him; he went from HOPING to have a part in the resurrection to **KNOWING**. And this KNOWING changed him forever.
cheers,
TM
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Sunday Mar 14th, thoughts going in
The Parable of the Prodigal Son…
The text from Luke chapter 15 is long enough that I’ve opted not to include it here. Besides, it’s one of those stories that is actually quite well known. A brief summary would go as follows:
This parable occurs in a chapter of parables with the common theme of “lost & found.” In each case something of SOME value—a sheep, a coin, a son—had been “lost,” and then “re-found.” As the parables of the lost sheep & coin are relatively short, the parable of the lost/prodigal son significantly dominates the chapter, though when it comes to chapters per se one must remember that Luke’s original gospel did not have chapter headings, it was simply a long rambling story.
So, as I say, the story is fairly well known, and today’s commentators also seem to be mostly on the same page when it comes to the “gotch-yas” found within the story. Here are just a few:
--In this culture ***if*** a son (younger or older) had approached his father and demanded his share of the inheritance NOW, what he would’ve likely received was a beating for his insolence. He perhaps may even have been thrown out of the family house. This was a patriarchal society. That the father GRANTED this demand would’ve been seen as a sign of extreme weakness, and even instability by the locals and extended family. They would literally have thought the father had lost his mind.
--That the younger son ends up in a far off land among the Gentiles, eventually tending pigs when his fortunes are lost, would go down very well with Jesus’ hearers. This would be “getting his just deserts.” He has turned his back on his father, his homeland, and his [Jewish] heritage. At this point, the parable is proverbial. In vs 17 the son “comes to his senses” (NIV). This is *not the same as repentance, At least, Luke appears to be making a distinction. The word “metanoia” is never used. In the Greek the young man literally “comes to himself,” and then he spins the line he’ll say to his father: “I have sinned against heaven and against you.” In other words, just as the young man manipulated his father in the first part of the parable, it appears that he intends to manipulate him again.
--The image of the father *running to greet the son would just be over the top. At this point Jesus’ listeners would be wondering what planet he’s from. The dignified old patriarch in his long flowing robes would NEVER run unless he were being chased by an enemy or something. And *IF he had granted the wayward son an audience, it would merely have been to save some face by passing final judgment on him & throwing him back out on his ear.
--Last is the reaction of the older brother which at one level seems to be justified and even interested in preserving a sense of family honor etc., and yet he is not guiltless when it comes to dishonoring the father, as he displays anger toward his father and forces the father to beg for his attendance and reconciliation.
So much for some of the details about the parable. I accept as a given that the whole purpose of a parable is to teach us something about God that would not otherwise be suspected on our part—based either on our reading of the Old Testament, or our private hunches. Having said that, the God-figure of the father in this parable seems almost gracious to a FAULT. Where is judgment? Where is sovereignty? Where, for that matter, is true repentance? Also, are we supposed to identify ourselves as one of the sons, and if so, which one? The way Luke organizes his material, the story seemed to have been precipitated by the fact that Pharisees were grumbling that Jesus was welcoming of “tax collectors and sinners.” In other words, the religious professionals, the Pharisees *may have been the older brother figure, with society’s outsiders, the tax collectors and prostitutes etc. constituting the younger brother figure. But at the time Luke wrote this (post 70AD) he may also have had the division of developing rabbinic Judaism in mind for the older brother, with the mixed Jewish/Gentile Jesus movement as the younger brother. Regardless, we’re not in first century Palestine or 1st generation church setting, we’re here in 2010, so what does this parable mean for us today?
The bottom line is that it seems to illustrate that God is a lot more gracious than we generally give him credit for being.
TM
The text from Luke chapter 15 is long enough that I’ve opted not to include it here. Besides, it’s one of those stories that is actually quite well known. A brief summary would go as follows:
This parable occurs in a chapter of parables with the common theme of “lost & found.” In each case something of SOME value—a sheep, a coin, a son—had been “lost,” and then “re-found.” As the parables of the lost sheep & coin are relatively short, the parable of the lost/prodigal son significantly dominates the chapter, though when it comes to chapters per se one must remember that Luke’s original gospel did not have chapter headings, it was simply a long rambling story.
So, as I say, the story is fairly well known, and today’s commentators also seem to be mostly on the same page when it comes to the “gotch-yas” found within the story. Here are just a few:
--In this culture ***if*** a son (younger or older) had approached his father and demanded his share of the inheritance NOW, what he would’ve likely received was a beating for his insolence. He perhaps may even have been thrown out of the family house. This was a patriarchal society. That the father GRANTED this demand would’ve been seen as a sign of extreme weakness, and even instability by the locals and extended family. They would literally have thought the father had lost his mind.
--That the younger son ends up in a far off land among the Gentiles, eventually tending pigs when his fortunes are lost, would go down very well with Jesus’ hearers. This would be “getting his just deserts.” He has turned his back on his father, his homeland, and his [Jewish] heritage. At this point, the parable is proverbial. In vs 17 the son “comes to his senses” (NIV). This is *not the same as repentance, At least, Luke appears to be making a distinction. The word “metanoia” is never used. In the Greek the young man literally “comes to himself,” and then he spins the line he’ll say to his father: “I have sinned against heaven and against you.” In other words, just as the young man manipulated his father in the first part of the parable, it appears that he intends to manipulate him again.
--The image of the father *running to greet the son would just be over the top. At this point Jesus’ listeners would be wondering what planet he’s from. The dignified old patriarch in his long flowing robes would NEVER run unless he were being chased by an enemy or something. And *IF he had granted the wayward son an audience, it would merely have been to save some face by passing final judgment on him & throwing him back out on his ear.
--Last is the reaction of the older brother which at one level seems to be justified and even interested in preserving a sense of family honor etc., and yet he is not guiltless when it comes to dishonoring the father, as he displays anger toward his father and forces the father to beg for his attendance and reconciliation.
So much for some of the details about the parable. I accept as a given that the whole purpose of a parable is to teach us something about God that would not otherwise be suspected on our part—based either on our reading of the Old Testament, or our private hunches. Having said that, the God-figure of the father in this parable seems almost gracious to a FAULT. Where is judgment? Where is sovereignty? Where, for that matter, is true repentance? Also, are we supposed to identify ourselves as one of the sons, and if so, which one? The way Luke organizes his material, the story seemed to have been precipitated by the fact that Pharisees were grumbling that Jesus was welcoming of “tax collectors and sinners.” In other words, the religious professionals, the Pharisees *may have been the older brother figure, with society’s outsiders, the tax collectors and prostitutes etc. constituting the younger brother figure. But at the time Luke wrote this (post 70AD) he may also have had the division of developing rabbinic Judaism in mind for the older brother, with the mixed Jewish/Gentile Jesus movement as the younger brother. Regardless, we’re not in first century Palestine or 1st generation church setting, we’re here in 2010, so what does this parable mean for us today?
The bottom line is that it seems to illustrate that God is a lot more gracious than we generally give him credit for being.
TM
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Sunday Mar 7th, thoughts going in
Lent 3
Luke 13:1 About this time Jesus was informed that Pilate had murdered some people from Galilee as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple. 2 “Do you think those Galileans were worse sinners than all the other people from Galilee?” Jesus asked. “Is that why they suffered? 3 Not at all! And you will perish, too, unless you repent of your sins and turn to God. 4 And what about the eighteen people who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them? Were they the worst sinners in Jerusalem? 5 No, and I tell you again that unless you repent, you will perish, too.”6 Then Jesus told this story: “A man planted a fig tree in his garden and came again and again to see if there was any fruit on it, but he was always disappointed. 7 Finally, he said to his gardener, ‘I’ve waited three years, and there hasn’t been a single fig! Cut it down. It’s just taking up space in the garden.’
8 “The gardener answered, ‘Sir, give it one more chance. Leave it another year, and I’ll give it special attention and plenty of fertilizer. 9 If we get figs next year, fine. If not, then you can cut it down.’”
In our Lenten series “Roads of Life,” this week’s road is called the Road of Judgment. As I’ve read & re-read this passage, several thoughts come to mind, thoughts like: “It is appointed unto man once to die, and then comes judgment (Heb 9:27),” and “no one gets out of here alive.”
I remember as a seminarian sitting in homiletics class (preaching class) hearing about the “mirror of reality.” Lutheran pastors are formed to preach in terms of LAW and GOSPEL. Ideally, from a given text, the preacher is to point out God’s demands that we’ve failed to meet (LAW), and also present God’s free grace that’s been showered upon us for the sake of his Son Jesus (GOSPEL). The Law, especially in its use here, is supposed to function as a ‘mirror.’ It’s supposed to point out to the sinner our short-comings, the places where we’ve offended God, and God’s righteous indignation at this offense. It is supposed to drive us to our knees for the purpose of responding to the Gospel.
Homiletically speaking, such Law/Gospel emphasis is supposed to be detectable in nearly every type/form of Lutheran preaching—with one exception: the funeral sermon. As finite creatures fully cognizant of our own limited life span, there is no need for the “mirror of the Law” when the “mirror of reality”……the coffin containing the dead body of a friend or loved one….is up there staring us in the face. Even the youngest, most vibrant among us cannot escape the reality of death and our own finitude.
That’s what this passage is about. DEATH HAPPENS. And for those who haven’t died **YET**, this is no indication of an inherent “extra-righteousness” within. Vss 1-5 are composed of interesting contrasts: Galileans vs Judeans; those cut down by human treachery vs those who perished “needlessly” in an accident. The only thing they have in common is that each of those people woke up that morning expecting that they’d have more days on planet earth. But they didn’t. It is appointed unto man once to die, and then comes judgment. No one gets outa here alive.
Since the solution isn’t a matter of living longer if we so choose, the ONLY thing we CAN do is adopt a life of REPENTANCE….hence the parable of the fig tree. While the absence of fruit on the tree corresponds to an absence of repentance, it is noteworthy that the Christ figure/gardener stands as both the intercessor and the initiator, vs 8: “The gardener answered, ‘Sir, give it one more chance. Leave it another year, and I’ll give it special attention.” As the Scriptures tell us, “Today is [always] the day of salvation.” But the beautiful gospel news isn’t simply that God calls us to repent, it’s that Christ our intercessor initiates this second chance life of repentance FOR US. HOW? By intersecting his life with ours….which is always through Word and Sacrament. These are not empty externals, but powerful means by which Christ comes to us and makes a difference in our lives.
Cheers,
TM
Luke 13:1 About this time Jesus was informed that Pilate had murdered some people from Galilee as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple. 2 “Do you think those Galileans were worse sinners than all the other people from Galilee?” Jesus asked. “Is that why they suffered? 3 Not at all! And you will perish, too, unless you repent of your sins and turn to God. 4 And what about the eighteen people who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them? Were they the worst sinners in Jerusalem? 5 No, and I tell you again that unless you repent, you will perish, too.”6 Then Jesus told this story: “A man planted a fig tree in his garden and came again and again to see if there was any fruit on it, but he was always disappointed. 7 Finally, he said to his gardener, ‘I’ve waited three years, and there hasn’t been a single fig! Cut it down. It’s just taking up space in the garden.’
8 “The gardener answered, ‘Sir, give it one more chance. Leave it another year, and I’ll give it special attention and plenty of fertilizer. 9 If we get figs next year, fine. If not, then you can cut it down.’”
In our Lenten series “Roads of Life,” this week’s road is called the Road of Judgment. As I’ve read & re-read this passage, several thoughts come to mind, thoughts like: “It is appointed unto man once to die, and then comes judgment (Heb 9:27),” and “no one gets out of here alive.”
I remember as a seminarian sitting in homiletics class (preaching class) hearing about the “mirror of reality.” Lutheran pastors are formed to preach in terms of LAW and GOSPEL. Ideally, from a given text, the preacher is to point out God’s demands that we’ve failed to meet (LAW), and also present God’s free grace that’s been showered upon us for the sake of his Son Jesus (GOSPEL). The Law, especially in its use here, is supposed to function as a ‘mirror.’ It’s supposed to point out to the sinner our short-comings, the places where we’ve offended God, and God’s righteous indignation at this offense. It is supposed to drive us to our knees for the purpose of responding to the Gospel.
Homiletically speaking, such Law/Gospel emphasis is supposed to be detectable in nearly every type/form of Lutheran preaching—with one exception: the funeral sermon. As finite creatures fully cognizant of our own limited life span, there is no need for the “mirror of the Law” when the “mirror of reality”……the coffin containing the dead body of a friend or loved one….is up there staring us in the face. Even the youngest, most vibrant among us cannot escape the reality of death and our own finitude.
That’s what this passage is about. DEATH HAPPENS. And for those who haven’t died **YET**, this is no indication of an inherent “extra-righteousness” within. Vss 1-5 are composed of interesting contrasts: Galileans vs Judeans; those cut down by human treachery vs those who perished “needlessly” in an accident. The only thing they have in common is that each of those people woke up that morning expecting that they’d have more days on planet earth. But they didn’t. It is appointed unto man once to die, and then comes judgment. No one gets outa here alive.
Since the solution isn’t a matter of living longer if we so choose, the ONLY thing we CAN do is adopt a life of REPENTANCE….hence the parable of the fig tree. While the absence of fruit on the tree corresponds to an absence of repentance, it is noteworthy that the Christ figure/gardener stands as both the intercessor and the initiator, vs 8: “The gardener answered, ‘Sir, give it one more chance. Leave it another year, and I’ll give it special attention.” As the Scriptures tell us, “Today is [always] the day of salvation.” But the beautiful gospel news isn’t simply that God calls us to repent, it’s that Christ our intercessor initiates this second chance life of repentance FOR US. HOW? By intersecting his life with ours….which is always through Word and Sacrament. These are not empty externals, but powerful means by which Christ comes to us and makes a difference in our lives.
Cheers,
TM
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Sunday Feb 28th, thoughts going in
Lent 2
Luke 13:31-35
31 At that time some Pharisees came to Jesus and said to him, "Leave this place and go somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you." 32 He replied, "Go tell that fox, 'I will keep on driving out demons and healing people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal.' 33 In any case, I must press on today and tomorrow and the next day--for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem! 34 "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 35 Look, your house is left to you desolate. I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.' "
The 2nd Sunday of Lent’s gospel reading in year C comes from a section in Luke that is commonly called the “travel narrative,” or in other words, the series of stories that occur WHILE Jesus is traveling to Jerusalem to die.
Given that I have chosen to hook myself to a Lenten sermon series of “Roads of Life,” a passage from the Travel Narrative is particularly appropriate on several fronts. This week’s “road” is the “ROAD OF DANGER,” which is extremely evident within the text itself.
V31 says: At that time some Pharisees came to Jesus and said to him, "Leave this place and go somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you. Some commentators see this as a less than genuine “concern” on the part of these Pharisees, because they have fallen into the thinking that ALL Pharisees are ALWAYS antagonistic to Jesus. This is an over-simplification of the matter, especially in Luke-Acts. There’s nothing in the context of the text to make us think that these PARTICULAR Pharisees—whoever they are—don’t have Jesus’ well being in mind. Another part of that thinking is that they’re trying to ‘herd’ Jesus from this trans-Jordan area that’s under Herod’s control toward Judea, where the Jewish ruling class has more control (so that they can do him in). The problem with this logic is that (a) if they wanted him ‘done in,’ they’ve already said Herod wants to kill him, why not just rat him out to Herod? And (b) Jesus is on his way to Judea/Jerusalem anyway! So, I go with the opinion that these particular Pharisees mean Jesus no harm and they’re legitimately warning him about threats they’ve heard.
Another important detail is that these are extremely VALID threats. This is the same Herod [Antipas] who had John the Baptist—an EXTREMELY popular local prophet—not only imprisoned, but then put to death. Clearly, Herod had no qualms against killing a supposed ‘holy man.’ One can well imagine that if Herod “wants to kill you,” you will likely end up dead. The practical application here is that on the ROAD OF DANGER, the risks & threats are REAL. In 21st c. America we almost have to deal in metaphors, as we risk practically nothing when we gather in worship or buy one of hundreds of possible copies of the bible at our local reseller. We constantly need to remind ourselves that brothers & sisters in the faith in other lands risk their lives simply by trying to follow Jesus. Their threats are real. What are our threats?
Another interesting aspect of this reading is Jesus’ response to the news that he’s in danger. It’s almost belligerent. Vs 32: “Go tell that fox…” basically, go tell him that I’m not changing my itinerary one bit. “Fox,” by the way does not likely carry with it our sense of “cunning” or “shrewdness.” Herod was about as cunning as a wrecking ball. A fox was a dangerous, though lower level predator; an apt description of one of Rome’s client bully-kings, to be sure. I think Luke’s primary point in this section of the text is to remind us that Jesus chooses this path INTENTIONALLY. He knows, or at least senses what lies ahead, and yet he is driven to it because he realizes it’s the Father’s will. In vs 33 he says, “in any case, I MUST PRESS ON…” which is the English rendering of the Greek “dei” (it is NECESSARY).
One of those perplexing mysteries for me has always gone like this….if Jesus HAD to die for the sins of the world, why didn’t he die at some of the other places of danger in his life? Why didn’t Herod the Great kill him when he slaughtered the Holy Innocents of Bethlehem? Why didn’t the mob at Nazareth succeed in throwing him off the cliff? Why, why why? Texts like this seem to point to something necessarily PARTICULAR about the type & place of death as being just as important as the death itself. Regardless, Jesus illustrates his ultimate dedication to the Father’s will in deliberately holding fast to this path. It’s CHALLENGING for us, because we--especially in our post-modern culture—do not often idealize someone with a “martyr complex.” We tend to think, what a dope! Run away! Choose life! But for Jesus, it’s not that he was choosing death….as much as he was CHOOSING LOVE….which happened to lead through death.
The passage ends with a poignant and heavily symbolic lament over Jerusalem. The “house that’s left to them desolate” V35 is an obvious Lukan (post 70AD) remark regarding the utter destruction of the Temple by Rome. The imagery of chicks who refuse to be gathered brings several things to mind: in nature it’s instinctive; they WOULD have come, but in God’s kingdom, robotic or forced conversion is never the case. The hen stands willing to gather us in, but it’s through the love of the Gospel not force. The other thing that comes to mind is that if the chicks refuse to be gathered, it’s either because they feel powerful enough on their own OR they feel they can find a better protector than a mother (who in nature usually protects her chicks simply by giving her own life to the predator). In either case, the chicks are sadly mistaken.
When I read this passage and think of the ROAD OF DANGER, I can’t help but think of Salvation Army Maj. Philip Wise. Major Wise was gunned down by two men outside of a community center in Little Rock, AK, this last Christmas Eve. That’s right, CHRISTMAS EVE. The men wanted money. Major Wise and his wife (also a Salvation Army officer) and three kids were supposed to be going home to spend the holidays with family. Some of us, when we read that story, were filled with hatred and loathing that such a good man was brutally murdered. If he were with us in earthly ministry today, I wonder what Jesus would’ve done. My hunch is that he would’ve gone to Little Rock to minister on that ROAD OF DANGER.
Cheers,
TM
Luke 13:31-35
31 At that time some Pharisees came to Jesus and said to him, "Leave this place and go somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you." 32 He replied, "Go tell that fox, 'I will keep on driving out demons and healing people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal.' 33 In any case, I must press on today and tomorrow and the next day--for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem! 34 "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 35 Look, your house is left to you desolate. I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.' "
The 2nd Sunday of Lent’s gospel reading in year C comes from a section in Luke that is commonly called the “travel narrative,” or in other words, the series of stories that occur WHILE Jesus is traveling to Jerusalem to die.
Given that I have chosen to hook myself to a Lenten sermon series of “Roads of Life,” a passage from the Travel Narrative is particularly appropriate on several fronts. This week’s “road” is the “ROAD OF DANGER,” which is extremely evident within the text itself.
V31 says: At that time some Pharisees came to Jesus and said to him, "Leave this place and go somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you. Some commentators see this as a less than genuine “concern” on the part of these Pharisees, because they have fallen into the thinking that ALL Pharisees are ALWAYS antagonistic to Jesus. This is an over-simplification of the matter, especially in Luke-Acts. There’s nothing in the context of the text to make us think that these PARTICULAR Pharisees—whoever they are—don’t have Jesus’ well being in mind. Another part of that thinking is that they’re trying to ‘herd’ Jesus from this trans-Jordan area that’s under Herod’s control toward Judea, where the Jewish ruling class has more control (so that they can do him in). The problem with this logic is that (a) if they wanted him ‘done in,’ they’ve already said Herod wants to kill him, why not just rat him out to Herod? And (b) Jesus is on his way to Judea/Jerusalem anyway! So, I go with the opinion that these particular Pharisees mean Jesus no harm and they’re legitimately warning him about threats they’ve heard.
Another important detail is that these are extremely VALID threats. This is the same Herod [Antipas] who had John the Baptist—an EXTREMELY popular local prophet—not only imprisoned, but then put to death. Clearly, Herod had no qualms against killing a supposed ‘holy man.’ One can well imagine that if Herod “wants to kill you,” you will likely end up dead. The practical application here is that on the ROAD OF DANGER, the risks & threats are REAL. In 21st c. America we almost have to deal in metaphors, as we risk practically nothing when we gather in worship or buy one of hundreds of possible copies of the bible at our local reseller. We constantly need to remind ourselves that brothers & sisters in the faith in other lands risk their lives simply by trying to follow Jesus. Their threats are real. What are our threats?
Another interesting aspect of this reading is Jesus’ response to the news that he’s in danger. It’s almost belligerent. Vs 32: “Go tell that fox…” basically, go tell him that I’m not changing my itinerary one bit. “Fox,” by the way does not likely carry with it our sense of “cunning” or “shrewdness.” Herod was about as cunning as a wrecking ball. A fox was a dangerous, though lower level predator; an apt description of one of Rome’s client bully-kings, to be sure. I think Luke’s primary point in this section of the text is to remind us that Jesus chooses this path INTENTIONALLY. He knows, or at least senses what lies ahead, and yet he is driven to it because he realizes it’s the Father’s will. In vs 33 he says, “in any case, I MUST PRESS ON…” which is the English rendering of the Greek “dei” (it is NECESSARY).
One of those perplexing mysteries for me has always gone like this….if Jesus HAD to die for the sins of the world, why didn’t he die at some of the other places of danger in his life? Why didn’t Herod the Great kill him when he slaughtered the Holy Innocents of Bethlehem? Why didn’t the mob at Nazareth succeed in throwing him off the cliff? Why, why why? Texts like this seem to point to something necessarily PARTICULAR about the type & place of death as being just as important as the death itself. Regardless, Jesus illustrates his ultimate dedication to the Father’s will in deliberately holding fast to this path. It’s CHALLENGING for us, because we--especially in our post-modern culture—do not often idealize someone with a “martyr complex.” We tend to think, what a dope! Run away! Choose life! But for Jesus, it’s not that he was choosing death….as much as he was CHOOSING LOVE….which happened to lead through death.
The passage ends with a poignant and heavily symbolic lament over Jerusalem. The “house that’s left to them desolate” V35 is an obvious Lukan (post 70AD) remark regarding the utter destruction of the Temple by Rome. The imagery of chicks who refuse to be gathered brings several things to mind: in nature it’s instinctive; they WOULD have come, but in God’s kingdom, robotic or forced conversion is never the case. The hen stands willing to gather us in, but it’s through the love of the Gospel not force. The other thing that comes to mind is that if the chicks refuse to be gathered, it’s either because they feel powerful enough on their own OR they feel they can find a better protector than a mother (who in nature usually protects her chicks simply by giving her own life to the predator). In either case, the chicks are sadly mistaken.
When I read this passage and think of the ROAD OF DANGER, I can’t help but think of Salvation Army Maj. Philip Wise. Major Wise was gunned down by two men outside of a community center in Little Rock, AK, this last Christmas Eve. That’s right, CHRISTMAS EVE. The men wanted money. Major Wise and his wife (also a Salvation Army officer) and three kids were supposed to be going home to spend the holidays with family. Some of us, when we read that story, were filled with hatred and loathing that such a good man was brutally murdered. If he were with us in earthly ministry today, I wonder what Jesus would’ve done. My hunch is that he would’ve gone to Little Rock to minister on that ROAD OF DANGER.
Cheers,
TM
Thursday, February 18, 2010
sunday Feb 21st, thoughts going in
Jesus Is Tested in the Wilderness
4:1-13pp -- Mt 4:1-11; Mk 1:12,13
1 Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, 2 where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry. 3 The devil said to him, "If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread." 4 Jesus answered, "It is written: 'People do not live on bread alone.' " 5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours." 8 Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.' " 9 The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down from here. 10 For it is written: " 'He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; 11 they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.' " 12 Jesus answered, "It is said: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.' " 13 When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.
For Lent, and at the suggestion of Sundays & Seasons, I’m locking myself in to a neat sounding sermon series entitled “Roads of Life.” In this series, each Sunday of Lent will explore a different “road.” The first Sunday of Lent explores the “Road of Truth.”
Having said that, there is still an opportunity to break the text down in preparation for the coming Sunday:
Vs1: Note that Jesus was led “by the Spirit into the wilderness.” It is a TRUTH that sometimes our own “wilderness experiences” happen PRECISELY because God led us out there in the first place. Granted, maybe we bumbled/stumbled our way out there accidentally because we walked away from God, but more than likely if we did that, we’re not in the ‘wilderness,’ we’re [metaphorically speaking] in Herod’s palace taking part in some drunken orgy. The point is this….when God leads us out into the wilderness, our response should not be “God, what on earth were you thinking?” We need to remember that God’s MISSION (think mission in military terms) is to redeem the world. This is accomplished by sending the troops out on dangerous missions—sometimes in the wilderness.
Vs2: This is more of a ‘feeling’ than anything concrete, but the flow of the text gives us the impression that the wilderness is a common abode of the Devil. Like….Jesus goes there, & Satan was there waiting for him—he doesn’t just “appear.” At the very least, Satan is ‘comfortable’ in the wilderness.
Vss 3-4: Jesus is fasting—evidently in the total sense, going completely without food. In some ways he’s stacking the deck against himself, becoming physically weaker. However, the battle he’s fighting—though it includes physical matter—is a spiritual one. When he responds to Satan’s suggestion “people do not live by bread alone,” he is saying that there is A LIFE that he is tapping into that does not require bread to support. This is the spiritual life. Note a truth: Satan appears to be simply offering a helpful suggestion: “hey man, you look hungry; you’ve got the power, turn this rock into bread.” HOWEVER, a simple suggestion offered at the wrong time can VERY WELL equal temptation…in which, succumbing to it, would equal SIN. Of course as every commentator points out, Jesus counters Satan with THE WORD.
Vss 5-8: The text is vague as to whether this happens literally, or if this is some kind of vision or altered state of consciousness for Jesus. Some question whether or not the Devil is being TOTALLY truthful when he says that the world’s authority & splendor belongs to him & he can give it to anyone he wants. John 12:31 is mustered in support, when it says now the “prince/ruler of this world is cast out.” BUT in John’s gospel the “world” in this context refers not to the physical reality around us, but rather to the sphere of unbelief/rejection of Jesus. In contrast, Romans 13 teaches that human governments belong to God—even tho they are often used against him by sinful rulers. So, this “offer” on Satan’s part may or may not have been legit. Regardless, Jesus doesn’t get hung up on THAT detail, he goes for the salient detail of WORSHIP….and who alone is worthy of worship.
Vss 9-12—is it just coincidence that after mentioning “worship” the devil leads Jesus to the pinnacle of the Temple (evidently this was a real bodily experience)?
I think one of the neat things about this week’s concentration being on the “road of truth” is that both Satan and Jesus use The Scriptures. The Scriptures are “quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword,” but they’re not magic. In diabolical hands they can be twisted to say almost anything.
This is challenging because we all want and need not only access to the book of truth, but to its right interpretation.
cheers,
TM
4:1-13pp -- Mt 4:1-11; Mk 1:12,13
1 Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, 2 where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry. 3 The devil said to him, "If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread." 4 Jesus answered, "It is written: 'People do not live on bread alone.' " 5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours." 8 Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.' " 9 The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down from here. 10 For it is written: " 'He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; 11 they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.' " 12 Jesus answered, "It is said: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.' " 13 When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.
For Lent, and at the suggestion of Sundays & Seasons, I’m locking myself in to a neat sounding sermon series entitled “Roads of Life.” In this series, each Sunday of Lent will explore a different “road.” The first Sunday of Lent explores the “Road of Truth.”
Having said that, there is still an opportunity to break the text down in preparation for the coming Sunday:
Vs1: Note that Jesus was led “by the Spirit into the wilderness.” It is a TRUTH that sometimes our own “wilderness experiences” happen PRECISELY because God led us out there in the first place. Granted, maybe we bumbled/stumbled our way out there accidentally because we walked away from God, but more than likely if we did that, we’re not in the ‘wilderness,’ we’re [metaphorically speaking] in Herod’s palace taking part in some drunken orgy. The point is this….when God leads us out into the wilderness, our response should not be “God, what on earth were you thinking?” We need to remember that God’s MISSION (think mission in military terms) is to redeem the world. This is accomplished by sending the troops out on dangerous missions—sometimes in the wilderness.
Vs2: This is more of a ‘feeling’ than anything concrete, but the flow of the text gives us the impression that the wilderness is a common abode of the Devil. Like….Jesus goes there, & Satan was there waiting for him—he doesn’t just “appear.” At the very least, Satan is ‘comfortable’ in the wilderness.
Vss 3-4: Jesus is fasting—evidently in the total sense, going completely without food. In some ways he’s stacking the deck against himself, becoming physically weaker. However, the battle he’s fighting—though it includes physical matter—is a spiritual one. When he responds to Satan’s suggestion “people do not live by bread alone,” he is saying that there is A LIFE that he is tapping into that does not require bread to support. This is the spiritual life. Note a truth: Satan appears to be simply offering a helpful suggestion: “hey man, you look hungry; you’ve got the power, turn this rock into bread.” HOWEVER, a simple suggestion offered at the wrong time can VERY WELL equal temptation…in which, succumbing to it, would equal SIN. Of course as every commentator points out, Jesus counters Satan with THE WORD.
Vss 5-8: The text is vague as to whether this happens literally, or if this is some kind of vision or altered state of consciousness for Jesus. Some question whether or not the Devil is being TOTALLY truthful when he says that the world’s authority & splendor belongs to him & he can give it to anyone he wants. John 12:31 is mustered in support, when it says now the “prince/ruler of this world is cast out.” BUT in John’s gospel the “world” in this context refers not to the physical reality around us, but rather to the sphere of unbelief/rejection of Jesus. In contrast, Romans 13 teaches that human governments belong to God—even tho they are often used against him by sinful rulers. So, this “offer” on Satan’s part may or may not have been legit. Regardless, Jesus doesn’t get hung up on THAT detail, he goes for the salient detail of WORSHIP….and who alone is worthy of worship.
Vss 9-12—is it just coincidence that after mentioning “worship” the devil leads Jesus to the pinnacle of the Temple (evidently this was a real bodily experience)?
I think one of the neat things about this week’s concentration being on the “road of truth” is that both Satan and Jesus use The Scriptures. The Scriptures are “quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword,” but they’re not magic. In diabolical hands they can be twisted to say almost anything.
This is challenging because we all want and need not only access to the book of truth, but to its right interpretation.
cheers,
TM
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Sunday Feb 14th, thoughts going in
The Transfiguration
Luke 9:28 About eight days after Jesus said this, he took Peter, John and James with him and went up onto a mountain to pray. 29 As he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became as bright as a flash of lightning. 30 Two men, Moses and Elijah, 31 appeared in glorious splendor, talking with Jesus. They spoke about his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfillment at Jerusalem. 32 Peter and his companions were very sleepy, but when they became fully awake, they saw his glory and the two men standing with him. 33 As the men were leaving Jesus, Peter said to him, "Master, it is good for us to be here. Let us put up three shelters--one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah." (He did not know what he was saying.) 34 While he was speaking, a cloud appeared and covered them, and they were afraid as they entered the cloud. 35 A voice came from the cloud, saying, "This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him." 36 When the voice had spoken, they found that Jesus was alone. The disciples kept this to themselves and did not tell anyone at that time what they had seen.
37 The next day, when they came down from the mountain, a large crowd met him. 38 A man in the crowd called out, "Teacher, I beg you to look at my son, for he is my only child. 39 A spirit seizes him and he suddenly screams; it throws him into convulsions so that he foams at the mouth. It scarcely ever leaves him and is destroying him. 40 I begged your disciples to drive it out, but they could not."
----
Well, it’s Transfiguration again….which is not exactly most preachers favorite Sunday of the church year for sermon development. There’s only so many ideas that fit, and after a while everyone’s heard it all before. Peter wants to preserve his mountain top experience, and you can’t do that, blah blah blah.
For some reason, this year more than others, I’ve really been thinking a lot about the OTHER NINE disciples—you know, the guys who NEVER get to see Jesus do any of the special stuff. When it comes to following the Lord, who has & who needs the stronger faith….those guys up there on the mountain seeing Moses & Elijah, hearing voices from heaven, seeing Jesus shining like the sun, or those guys down in the valley listening to some father’s problems about his demon possessed kid & not being able to fix the problem? Sometimes I wonder what kept them from chucking it all and going back to fishing or tax collecting. The only thing I can think of is that somehow the grace of God must’ve been sufficient in their lives to keep them from bolting.
It seems horribly relevant for us in our lot, since we’re not up on a mountain-top witnessing miraculous signs and wonders either…..but are, rather, slogging it out down here in the trenches with the demons. May we, like those other nine disciples, find God’s grace to be sufficient.
cheers,
TM
Luke 9:28 About eight days after Jesus said this, he took Peter, John and James with him and went up onto a mountain to pray. 29 As he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became as bright as a flash of lightning. 30 Two men, Moses and Elijah, 31 appeared in glorious splendor, talking with Jesus. They spoke about his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfillment at Jerusalem. 32 Peter and his companions were very sleepy, but when they became fully awake, they saw his glory and the two men standing with him. 33 As the men were leaving Jesus, Peter said to him, "Master, it is good for us to be here. Let us put up three shelters--one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah." (He did not know what he was saying.) 34 While he was speaking, a cloud appeared and covered them, and they were afraid as they entered the cloud. 35 A voice came from the cloud, saying, "This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him." 36 When the voice had spoken, they found that Jesus was alone. The disciples kept this to themselves and did not tell anyone at that time what they had seen.
37 The next day, when they came down from the mountain, a large crowd met him. 38 A man in the crowd called out, "Teacher, I beg you to look at my son, for he is my only child. 39 A spirit seizes him and he suddenly screams; it throws him into convulsions so that he foams at the mouth. It scarcely ever leaves him and is destroying him. 40 I begged your disciples to drive it out, but they could not."
----
Well, it’s Transfiguration again….which is not exactly most preachers favorite Sunday of the church year for sermon development. There’s only so many ideas that fit, and after a while everyone’s heard it all before. Peter wants to preserve his mountain top experience, and you can’t do that, blah blah blah.
For some reason, this year more than others, I’ve really been thinking a lot about the OTHER NINE disciples—you know, the guys who NEVER get to see Jesus do any of the special stuff. When it comes to following the Lord, who has & who needs the stronger faith….those guys up there on the mountain seeing Moses & Elijah, hearing voices from heaven, seeing Jesus shining like the sun, or those guys down in the valley listening to some father’s problems about his demon possessed kid & not being able to fix the problem? Sometimes I wonder what kept them from chucking it all and going back to fishing or tax collecting. The only thing I can think of is that somehow the grace of God must’ve been sufficient in their lives to keep them from bolting.
It seems horribly relevant for us in our lot, since we’re not up on a mountain-top witnessing miraculous signs and wonders either…..but are, rather, slogging it out down here in the trenches with the demons. May we, like those other nine disciples, find God’s grace to be sufficient.
cheers,
TM
Monday, February 8, 2010
Reading Project
Stephen Ministry reading project….
You may not know this, but part of our Stephen Ministry group’s continuing education is, typically, to read and discuss books that are relevant to caring ministry.
This year we’re reading two books by Dr. Alan Wolfelt: Understanding your grief, Ten essential touchstones for finding hope and healing in your heart, and A Handbook for Companioning the Mourner. As you can probably tell from the titles, the second book is more specifically relevant to the task of a Stephen Minister. However, it is my opinion that we are much more prepared to minister to someone else in their grief when we fully understand our own—hence the assignment of reading both books.
Having said that, it struck me that I should inform the whole parish as to this year’s Stephen Ministry reading assignment. After all, grief is common to all of us as humans, and Dr. Wolfelt has a particular gift when it comes to helping in this area. I would therefore heartily recommend his book Understanding your grief, Ten essential touchstones for finding hope and healing in your heart, isbn# 1879651351. This can be purchased online from Amazon.com or any number of other booksellers.
God bless,
Pastor Manwell
You may not know this, but part of our Stephen Ministry group’s continuing education is, typically, to read and discuss books that are relevant to caring ministry.
This year we’re reading two books by Dr. Alan Wolfelt: Understanding your grief, Ten essential touchstones for finding hope and healing in your heart, and A Handbook for Companioning the Mourner. As you can probably tell from the titles, the second book is more specifically relevant to the task of a Stephen Minister. However, it is my opinion that we are much more prepared to minister to someone else in their grief when we fully understand our own—hence the assignment of reading both books.
Having said that, it struck me that I should inform the whole parish as to this year’s Stephen Ministry reading assignment. After all, grief is common to all of us as humans, and Dr. Wolfelt has a particular gift when it comes to helping in this area. I would therefore heartily recommend his book Understanding your grief, Ten essential touchstones for finding hope and healing in your heart, isbn# 1879651351. This can be purchased online from Amazon.com or any number of other booksellers.
God bless,
Pastor Manwell
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
